United Passenger Dragged From Overbooked Flight

[Hawkeye10]

It was Republic DBA United Express

If that is so then a whole lot of people are wrong...do you have a link?

 

[Renae]

FLY RIGHT is not United's legal document of Contract of Carriage, this is,
https://www.united.com/web/en-US/content/contract-of-carriage.aspx#sec25
And it all deals with things they can do before boarding has occurred.

Well, you're wrong, and even if you WERE right they were wrong to ask him to leave, when he made a scene the pilot ordered him off, and THAT trumps all else.

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Old sins cast long shadows. I suspect the CEO's head needs to roll first.

I guess airlines are not like ferries, I can't seem to find a master schedule of all united flights leaving SeaTac, I don't even know where I want to go, just that I want to go somewhere and pickup a screaming "half our reservations just went to southwest and pretty please book this flight" rate....

 

[longview]

Well, you're wrong, and even if you WERE right they were wrong to ask him to leave, when he made a scene the pilot ordered him off, and THAT trumps all else.

Actually you do not know if the pilot was involved at all, and even then the pilot needs a real reason to violate the contract of carriage.

 

[Gaius46]

Well, that is where it gets hairy. Our flights used to show how many people were deadheading, what is unclear is when they realized they had to deadhead folks on this flight.

Yeah I know. The whole thing could have been avoided if they dealt with it before they let the passengers on. They could have just called it an "overbooking" situation, bumped some people and been done with it. That is assuming they knew about it before passengers were boarded.

 

[Hawkeye10]

No disagreement. Once security is called they're gonna get you off the plane one way or another. It makes no sense to fight it at that point.

Except judging by the media and DP it seems that most people are behind the passenger, not United, which argues that he made a call that we approve of.

Maybe we think that he was fighting for us.

 

[beefheart]

I read your post and deemed it factually incorrect. there was a reason to remove him, the airline wanted him on a different flight to deadhead their own crew, but the reason is none of the cop's business. the police cannot order an airline to accept a passenger, the correct procedure is remove the guy who doesn't own the plane in this discussion and tell him it's a civil matter.

Yeah I know. The whole thing could have been avoided if they dealt with it before they let the passengers on. They could have just called it an "overbooking" situation, bumped some people and been done with it. That is assuming they knew about it before passengers were boarded.

Pretty much. The cop is the most at fault for how he did it.

 

[beefheart]

I read your post and deemed it factually incorrect. there was a reason to remove him, the airline wanted him on a different flight to deadhead their own crew, but the reason is none of the cop's business. the police cannot order an airline to accept a passenger, the correct procedure is remove the guy who doesn't own the plane in this discussion and tell him it's a civil matter.

If that is so then a whole lot of people are wrong...do you have a link?

United and Republic share it. Yes, it was a regional flight operated by Republic. It was in the link I provided, the best explanation of what happened you will read on this, written by an aviation journalist.

 

[Renae]

Actually you do not know if the pilot was involved at all, and even then the pilot needs a real reason to violate the contract of carriage.

The crew ordered him off, he refused and became disruptive. The pilot would have to okay security (and if he didn't have a clue/wasn't involved that would be a huge deal) being brought in.

Again, HOW he was removed (the manner of removal) was on the security guards, but the airline has the right to kick you off, even after you're in your seat.

 

[beefheart]

I read your post and deemed it factually incorrect. there was a reason to remove him, the airline wanted him on a different flight to deadhead their own crew, but the reason is none of the cop's business. the police cannot order an airline to accept a passenger, the correct procedure is remove the guy who doesn't own the plane in this discussion and tell him it's a civil matter.

No disagreement. Once security is called they're gonna get you off the plane one way or another. It makes no sense to fight it at that point.

We used to do it more diplomatically, I was on a flight once and there was this hillbilly guy with no shirt and his dirty toddler (not her fault). Before the flight, the person I was with who was a pilot for the airline, gave him a tee shirt she got at the convention we were at. Hillbilly thanked her, then boarded without the shirt, and he was pretty hammered. Once he sat and we were ready to leave, they called him and his daughter up front on the intercom, making it look like he got an upgrade. They asked him to step into the jetway to talk, and boom....door closed, plane pushed, no disturbance.

 

[Hawkeye10]

For your enjoyment:

When Delta overbooks a flight, they let their passengers decide how much getting bumped is worth. I discovered this last week when I checked in online for my flight from Minneapolis to Philadelphia. What was the minimum I was willing to accept in travel vouchers to take a later flight — $500, $300, $200, less? After doing some rough mental calculations, I bid $300. High enough to cover most of a ticket to Mexico and low enough to be competitive without feeling exploited.

No deal. I boarded my flight on time and arrived in Philadelphia five minutes ahead of schedule.

Delta started this practice back in 2011

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/how-delta-masters-the-game-of-overbooking-flights/

 

[Hawkeye10]

United and Republic share it. Yes, it was a regional flight operated by Republic. It was in the link I provided, the best explanation of what happened you will read on this, written by an aviation journalist.

You are going to need to do better than that to convince me when everyone to include the United CEO is acting like United was in charge of this flight.

 

[beefheart]

I read your post and deemed it factually incorrect. there was a reason to remove him, the airline wanted him on a different flight to deadhead their own crew, but the reason is none of the cop's business. the police cannot order an airline to accept a passenger, the correct procedure is remove the guy who doesn't own the plane in this discussion and tell him it's a civil matter.

You are going to need to do better than that to convince me when everyone to include the United CEO is acting like United was in charge of this flight.

Republic was the actual carrier of the flight, it was their metal, their crew that is an absolute fact. Because the tix are sold by United, they get all the bad PR.

Looking at the schedule from ORD-SDF, United uses Republic, Skywest and Trans States Airlines as their regional partner for their flights.

 

[longview]

The crew ordered him off, he refused and became disruptive. The pilot would have to okay security (and if he didn't have a clue/wasn't involved that would be a huge deal) being brought in.

Again, HOW he was removed (the manner of removal) was on the security guards, but the airline has the right to kick you off, even after you're in your seat.

If you read the United Contract of Carriage, they mention boarding 45 times, I think there is some significance
they are placing on the act of boarding. People who write such legally binding documents do not usually add in words
because they like how they sound, they add them for a reason!

 

[Renae]

If you read the United Contract of Carriage, they mention boarding 45 times, I think there is some significance
they are placing on the act of boarding. People who write such legally binding documents do not usually add in words
because they like how they sound, they add them for a reason!

There is no significance, you're parroting twitter logic.

 

[Hawkeye10]

Republic was the actual carrier of the flight, it was their metal, their crew that is an absolute fact. Because the tix are sold by United, they get all the bad PR.

Looking at the schedule from ORD-SDF, United uses Republic, Skywest and Trans States Airlines as their regional partner for their flights.

OK, so journalism fails yet again, but you and I know that these commuter airlines are controlled by the majors that they work for, and then there is this:

The United Express flight was operated by Republic Airways but the passengers are considered United customers, United spokesman Charlie Hobart said.

United Airlines' brand takes a beating after bumped passenger dragged off plane - Chicago Tribune

 

[TurtleDude]

If United settles out of court the doctor will get somew money

But if United hangs tough at 69 the guy may not live long enough to collect anything

If I were United I'd settle quietly out of court

actually his claim survives his demise on behalf of his estate. He dies I am sure a good attorney will claim it was accentuated due to stress

 

[akyron]

Unfortunately, the way big businesses like United operate, they think they have complete control over the situation and don't need the customers consent to change the terms of the contract however they like.

That's really what this issue is about. Can they just do whatever they want?

Anyone can do whatever they want.

There are consequences however to actions.

 

[longview]

There is no significance, you're parroting twitter logic.

United has a set of printed rules that relate to how and when they can deny boarding to a paid passenger.
The legal demarcation seems to involve the act of boarding.
Had the legally binding Contract of Carrier meant to say they could revoke the ticket/contract
at any time, for any reason, it would have said so, as opposed to,

2.Boarding Priorities - If a flight is Oversold, no one may be denied boarding against his/her will until UA or other carrier personnel first ask for volunteers who will give up their reservations willingly in exchange for compensation as determined by UA. If there are not enough volunteers, other Passengers may be denied boarding involuntarily in accordance with UA’s boarding priority:

The only possible legal grounds the airline may have, is that they may be able to say that boarding
is an ongoing process, until the door is closed, but even that is on thin ice, because the ticket/contract,
is and individual user contract, not with the full passenger complement.

 

[Renae]

United has a set of printed rules that relate to how and when they can deny boarding to a paid passenger.
The legal demarcation seems to involve the act of boarding.
Had the legally binding Contract of Carrier meant to say they could revoke the ticket/contract
at any time, for any reason, it would have said so, as opposed to,

The only possible legal grounds the airline may have, is that they may be able to say that boarding
is an ongoing process, until the door is closed, but even that is on thin ice, because the ticket/contract,
is and individual user contract, not with the full passenger complement.

YAWN, YAWN YAWN.

It's been gone over, you're playign twitter logic, I have provided the evidence to show that's not the only time they can make you get off the plane, you are stuck on this, you don't matter, I'm so over this discussion. Like talking to a brick wall.

 

[Anthony60]

United may have been 100% within their rights in having the man removed from the flight. He refused to comply, people get removed from flights all the time because of that. But they had to know that there are cameras everywhere on a flight, and should have avoided what happened at all costs.

The guy seems like a bit of nut, with the screaming and refusal to move. He was defying the police, I don't think United had any control at that point. They should have kept upping the cash until they got four willing people. To remove people against their will is never going to look good, I don't think they put enough emphasis on that.

He was one guy, where did they get the other three? Did they run off the plane after what happened?

 

[Perotista]

I've never known a flight that didn't have standby passengers. This is just BS Airline policy to try to maximize profits at the expense of their customers.

I agree, overbooking or selling more seats than is available should be illegal. No ifs, ands, or buts.

 

[Bodi]

Grow up.

It's their plane.

:lol: "Grow up"

So, I legally purchase a ticket... go through all the security checks calmly and politely... dump my bottle of water... wait in ridiculous lines... wait for the ridiculous boarding... finally get to my seat... they come over and tell me that I have to leave... out of the hundreds + on board... for no reason other than they made a mistake... as I did not violate one law or procedure... I say that will ruin my travel plans... they go get cops and breach our legally binding contract... and "I" am the one acting immaturely?

I am sure I have traveled far beyond your travels but that is beside the point... also beside the point is your pathetic little ad hom attempt...


The point is your argument is stupid.

Do you have anything else or is this the extent of your debating... cough cough... "skills"?

 

[Bodi]

It should be noted that the other three passengers who were asked to leave did so without incident.

What the other three passengers did is irrelevant and would be thrown out as such...

Their desire for customers is irrelevant to the issue of whether their request here was both legal and reasonable and that, by refusing to comply, the passenger was a trespasser. It was reasonable in as much as it was necessary for the airline to maintain its operations and within the terms of its contract with the passenger.

No,. The customer purchsed a ticket allowing him on the plane... show me where , in their contract (ticket) it says that they can have him removed for any reason that they want.

Their request was legal in as much as they own the plane.

Tell that to the Christian Baker...

By these standards the airline was within its rights to request the passenger to leave and the passenger, by refusing such a request, was trespassing.

They can request anything they want... it is up to a court now to determine if him refusing the request was illegal.

 

[Bodi]

You can tell they have horrible lawyers by the ridiculously stupid comment the CEO of United gave blaming the passenger for the altercation.

Absolutely... That is why I only fly Air New Zealand, Air Singapore and Quantas.